in Newswire Published on March 22, 2023

AI ‘Robot Lawyer’ Not Licensed to Practice Law in Illinois, Class Action Claims [DISMISSED]

Last Updated on July 11, 2024

MillerKing, LLC v. DoNotPay, Inc.

Filed: March 15, 2023 ◆§ 3:23-cv-00863

An Illinois law firm alleges in a class action that AI-powered “world’s first robot lawyer” DoNotPay is unlawfully advertised and practices law in the state without proper licensure.

Defendant(s)

DoNotPay, Inc.

Law(s)

Lanham Act Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act

State(s)

Illinois

December 4, 2023 – AI ‘Robot Lawyer’ Class Action Thrown Out by Federal Judge

The proposed class action outlined on this page was dismissed without prejudice by a federal judge on November 17, 2023.

Want to stay in the loop on class actions that matter to you? Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.

In 16-page memo and order issued that day, United States District Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel granted DoNotPay’s May 2023 motion to dismiss the case, ruling that the plaintiff business had not adequately alleged that it sustained any real injury.

In particular, Judge Rosenstengel found that the parties are not direct competitors and that the plaintiff, an Illinois law firm, had not plausibly proven that it had lost clients or suffered reputational harm because of the defendant’s alleged actions.

“As argued by [DoNotPay], [the plaintiff] has not alleged any lost revenue or added expenditures as a result of [DoNotPay’s] conduct,” the judge wrote. “Nor has it alleged that any client or prospective client has withheld business, has considered withholding business, or has even heard of [the defendant].”

Court records indicate that the plaintiff has until December 18, 2023 to file an amended complaint.

Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.

An Illinois law firm alleges in a proposed class action that artificial intelligence-powered “world’s first robot lawyer” DoNotPay is unlawfully advertised and practices law in the state without proper licensure.

Want to stay in the loop on class actions that matter to you? Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.

The 40-page lawsuit alleges that DoNotPay touts the subscription service—which purportedly uses AI to perform a variety of legal services personalized to consumers’ needs and state laws—as an “artificially intelligent robot attorney” and has continued to illegally practice law despite warnings from state bar associations. In addition, the case says DoNotPay has continued to operate as usual after removing certain services from its site and promising to focus solely on consumer rights “products.”

“Dispensing legal advice without possessing the requisite expertise, competence, and licensure requirements causes, and predictably will continue to cause, irreparable harm to many citizens in need of legal services,” the suit claims, also acknowledging the damage done to competing law firms which are properly licensed.

Per the case, DoNotPay’s website offers to subscribers a slew of legal services, such as assistance in contesting parking tickets, drawing up documents and agreements, registering trademarks, initiating and filing lawsuits and providing statements to read in court.

The homepage advertises that DoNotPay can make drafting personalized contracts and agreements “stress-free” by “[generating] over 30 types of legal documents automatically,” the complaint says. By clicking “Standardized Legal Documents” on the homepage, a consumer can see a list of templates DoNotPay provides, including non-compete agreements, prenuptial agreements, residential lease agreements, non-disclosure agreements and more, the filing shares.

The website also offers personalized property tax guides and advice on appealing traffic tickets, for which it provides “arguments that work for most parking ticket disputes,” the lawsuit relays. Further, DoNotPay purports to offer assistance “with all your legal needs” when suing in small claims court, such as drafting “perfectly composed” demand letters, filling out required forms and issuing scripts to read in court, the suit states.

Although DoNotPay’s website touts high success rates—including a claim that it had disputed 250,000 parking tickets and reversed $4 million in fines by 2016—the case contends that these statistics are “questionable” and may be skewed by founder and CEO Joshua Browder’s methods of tallying “wins.”

Numerous DoNotPay subscribers have lodged their complaints online, including one consumer who was attempting to dispute a parking ticket and ended up paying a fine after the service generated a document that admitted fault, the filing says. Other complaints describe “demand letters that go undelivered and which do not actually contain demands” or documents with basic information misprinted, the suit shares.

DoNotPay’s errors can have serious legal consequences for the consumers who rely on its services, the complaint contends.

The lawsuit looks to represent any law firms in the United States in existence within the statute of limitations period.

Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.

Case Spotlight

Hair Relaxer Lawsuits

Women who developed ovarian or uterine cancer after using hair relaxers such as Dark & Lovely and Motions may now have an opportunity to take legal action.

Read more here: Hair Relaxer Cancer Lawsuits

How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?

Did you know there's usually nothing you need to do to join, sign up for, or add your name to new class action lawsuits when they're initially filed?

Read more here: How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?